06-23-2004, 01:44 PM
The Prince
by Niccolo Machiavelli
Amazon.com
When Lorenzo de' Medici seized control of the Florentine Republic in 1512, he summarily fired the Secretary to the Second Chancery of the Signoria and set in motion a fundamental change in the way we think about politics. The person who held the aforementioned office with the tongue-twisting title was none other than Niccolò Machiavelli, who, suddenly finding himself out of a job after 14 years of patriotic service, followed the career trajectory of many modern politicians into punditry. Unable to become an on-air political analyst for a television network, he only wrote a book. <b>But what a book The Prince is. Its essential contribution to modern political thought lies in Machiavelli's assertion of the then revolutionary idea that theological and moral imperatives have no place in the political arena. "It must be understood," Machiavelli avers, "that a prince ... cannot observe all of those virtues for which men are reputed good, because it is often necessary to act against mercy, against faith, against humanity, against frankness, against religion, in order to preserve the state." With just a little imagination, readers can discern parallels between a 16th-century principality and a 20th-century presidency</b>. --Tim Hogan
J. H. Hexter, Washington University
A readable text in vigorous prose. I have not read a translation of The Prince into English that is more lively. --This text refers to the Hardcover edition.
Book Description
Rejecting the traditional values of political theory, Machiavelli drew upon his own experiences of office in the turbulent Florentine republic to write his celebrated treatise on statecraft. While Machiavelli was only one of the many Florentine "prophets of force," he differed from the ruling elite in recognizing the complexity and fluidity of political life.
Translated by George Bull
Introduction by Anthony Grafton --This text refers to the Paperback edition.
See all editorial reviews...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Spotlight Reviews (What's this?)
Write an online review and share your thoughts with other customers.
14 of 15 people found the following review helpful:
a chilling reflection, August 11, 2001
Reviewer: teencynic (see more about me) from Nicosia, Cyprus
Machiavellism is generally used as a bad term, meaning that you'll do anything to get what you want, regardless, and everyone and anyone who stands in your way ought to be neutralised, pulverised.
But that's no the way it always was.
After getting the sack for being a good patriot, Machiavelli used his knowledge of the internal affairs fo Florentine politics and summed it up neatly in this taut, deadly-accurate treatise on human nature.
He's an observer, Machiavelli, and the Prince was written based on a boss of his, Cesare Borgia. Now Borgia (whose aim was to conquer Central Italy) wasn't one to let anything get into his way. He was ruthless, cunning, cruel. Did I mention that he's brilliant?
Machiavelli wrote on more, like on trading, on enemies, on governing. It teaches one on ways to become a politician, a president, or...a prince, with rules and tricks that every successful person uses but will never admit to.
All these lessons are packed into a slim tome, not quite novella as much as political guide, and the way through the minefields in this messy game of forging ahead.
After reading this, you either love it or hate it -I wouldn't know: I liked it. But no matter how hard one tries to deny what the author says, there's no way to escape from the parallels of Machiavelli's day and ours.
Was this review helpful to you?
56 of 58 people found the following review helpful:
Realistic Map of How Power is Achieved and Maintained, August 14, 2000
Reviewer: Wayne A. Smith (see more about me) from Wilmington, DE USA
There are two good reasons to read Machiavelli's classic, "The Prince."
First, so you'll know what everyone is referring to when you come across the adjective "machiavellian" in news stories or other media. This adjective has become so commonplace (and overused) it is almost a cliche. Also, most who use it have never read this letter from Machiavelli, a Rennaisance courtier to his Prince (written from prison), but they insist on peppering writings with this noun turned adjective so much that as a matter of clearly understanding what is meant by the term, famiality with this brief treatise is helpful.
Second, this book does describe most (not all) power situations very well. From politics to corporations to most settings where advancement, influence and control exist, Machiavelli's observations and rules apply.
You will also discover that Machiavelli was not as evil as he is understood to be in popular thought. What he was doing was describing the rules of the game that have existed and always will exist for many situations involving selfish humans in competition. Machiavelli's rules are neither good nor bad in themselves -- they describe a process. What is good or bad is how those who master Machiavelli's rules use their power and position, in a society that tempers actions according to law and basic Judeo-Christian principals. When those principals do not exist (as in Nazi Germany, the Middle Ages or under Communism, or by those who refuse to live by these constraints), Machiavelli's rules take on their demonic and evil cloak; usually because they serve demonic and evil ends. In societies where positive constraints exist, for example the U.S. political system, Machiavellian behavior can produce excellent results. A good example involves Abraham Lincoln, whose ambition led him to use every legitimate trick and stragety to master (and remove) political opponents. His mastery of Machiavellian behavior constrained by the US political system allowed him to save the Union and end slavery.
To fully appreciate the modern lessons that can be taken from this writing, one must translate Medieval sensibilites to their contemporary counterparts. The casual way in which Machiavelli discusses the need to kill opponents was necessary to those who wished to be princes 500 years ago. Today, of course, "killing" is translated as rendering less powerful, or taking an opponent out of the game.
What does one get from this book? It is a roadmap with insights and lessons about how to 1) get ahead of others to attain power; and 2) maintain and expand one's power in the face of others who would usurp one who is in a desirable position.
This book is about ruthlessness and putting the attainment of goals ahead of any other consideration. Plenty of maxims that are also tossed about frequently in media are to be found in Machiavelli's book: "the end justifies the means," "it is better to be feared than loved," "if you fight the prince, kill the prince" to name a few.
It is essential reading to anyone who would be in a competitive environment and hope to advance, if for no other reason than many of one's competitors operate by Machiavelli's dictums (which arise out of human instinct and selfishness). One does not have to operate according to Machaivelli's code -- many examples of alturism and "pluck and luck" exist to defeat any claim that Machiavelli's road map is essential for success. However, human nature and human history deliver far more examples of ruthless self-interest (Machiavellianism) behind success in power situations.
Is Machiavellianism bad? Not in and of itself. Remember, one must translate the Middle Age ethos to current practices -- there usually isn't blood spilled as a result of today's Machiavellian duels, just power and positon. Most political and business leaders are at least partly Machiavellian. The trick is using one's power to good ends. Thus, even though Lincoln and all of our presidents were Machiavellian in their climb to the White House, some of them did darn good work there. The same is true for business leaders. Jack Welch (GE), Bill Gates (Microsoft), anyone who advances past the first few rungs of the corporate ladder or dominates markets at the expense of competitors is using Machiavelli's dictums. The trick of a just and good society is to set the bounds by which power can be attained and exercised so that good and benefits will flow from those who are able to "claw their way to the top."
To summarize, read this book if you want to 1) truly understand when the adjective "Machiavelli" is used to describe people and 2) understand the rules by which most people navigate their way to power.
Was this review helpful to you?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All Customer Reviews
Average Customer Review:
Write an online review and share your thoughts with other customers.
0 of 1 people found the following review helpful:
The best bok written on Leadership, June 10, 2004
Reviewer: Gabriel Cruz (see more about me) from Glendale, AZ USA
The Prince is a classic and must read book for all people in leadership or going in to business. --This text refers to the Paperback edition
Was this review helpful to you?
A good guide to Politics and Leadership, June 2, 2004
Reviewer: David Orozco from Santa Barbara, CA USA
I've never read any book related to politics in my whole life, and I found out by one of my World History teachers, that this book is a good way to get into politics and learn to be a good leader for your people.
The book really explains or simulates almost every single problem that a king, prince, president or any kind of governor would face. The book talks about how to treat the people of your kingdom, Machiavelly argues if you should use Love to rule your people or fear, to support his ideas Machiavelli uses examples from past rulers explaining what weaknesses they had and big mistakes the made.
For the first politic book I've ever read I found it really interesting and really helpful, the only thing that I didn't really like about it, was that to get a better understanding of the book you have to get some more background of the Kings, Dukes and governors he used.
Was this review helpful to you?
1 of 1 people found the following review helpful:
Classic deserving of its fame, April 7, 2004
Reviewer: JPAN (see more about me) from Saint Paul, Minnesota
This classic treatise is the most famous work on the subject of political power, and with good cause. Machiavelli outlines the basic principles of how to properly govern a kingdom, from whether it is better to fight with native troops (he argues that it is better to lose with your own soldiers than with with mercenaries) to whether it is better to be loved or feared (he clearly sides with the latter). Despite its somewhat negative connotations, the author goes to great lengths to outline why he comes to the conclusions he does. Taken in their proper context, Machiavelli's positions are, I believe, much less inflamatory than their stereo-types. One also must considers the time and circumstances in which the book was written.
In conclusion, this book is a must-read for anyone who considers themselves to be a reader of classics. I picked up this edition in the airport for 4 dollars...how could you go wrong? Anyone would be proud to place this on his or her bookshelf. --This text refers to the Paperback edition
Was this review helpful to you?
25 of 25 people found the following review helpful:
Tricky Work, Tricky Translation--Highly Recommended!, February 28, 2004
Reviewer: John Russon (see more about me) from Toronto, ON Canada
Machiavelli was a moderately significant figure in Renaissance Florence at the time that city was busy shaping the essence of the modern world. His works (all of them, but especially the Prince) capture much of what is pivotal in this culture. The book is advice to princes on how to seize and hold power. Mostly, that means you need to trick people and use ruthless violence intelligently. (He suggests that, if you could invent something like the Catholic Church, you'd be in a specially good position to set up a rule that would draw a lot of allegiance and a lot of taxes, would have no responsibilities, and would never end.) It's great reading as literature and as history, and also incredibly subtle and insightful as an analysis of human psychology. Mostly, this work praises cunning intelligence; it is also written for the reader who possesses the same. Consequently, it is a book that requires real patience and attention if its real treasures are to be found. Mansfield's translation is, I believe, the best for allowing one to look for the inner depth of the book. The translation is inspired by the work of Leo Strauss, and, as is typical of Straussian translations, it is a translation that is extremely careful to reflect the subtleties of the language of the original in order to retain their complex intimations etc. This is the translation I use when I teach the book because of its precision and elegance. It also has helpful historical notes that provide some of the essential context that is necessary to understanding Machiavelli's words; (Machiavelli often, for example, describes some historical figure in a fashion which will suggest the opposite of his true point to the reader who does not take the trouble to learn the details of the context he is referring to, and Mansfield is helpful in supplying guides to the modern reader for what to study in order to get past these textual deceptions). Overall, this is an outstanding translation of one of the great books of Western culture. I recommend it highly. --This text refers to the Paperback edition
by Niccolo Machiavelli
Amazon.com
When Lorenzo de' Medici seized control of the Florentine Republic in 1512, he summarily fired the Secretary to the Second Chancery of the Signoria and set in motion a fundamental change in the way we think about politics. The person who held the aforementioned office with the tongue-twisting title was none other than Niccolò Machiavelli, who, suddenly finding himself out of a job after 14 years of patriotic service, followed the career trajectory of many modern politicians into punditry. Unable to become an on-air political analyst for a television network, he only wrote a book. <b>But what a book The Prince is. Its essential contribution to modern political thought lies in Machiavelli's assertion of the then revolutionary idea that theological and moral imperatives have no place in the political arena. "It must be understood," Machiavelli avers, "that a prince ... cannot observe all of those virtues for which men are reputed good, because it is often necessary to act against mercy, against faith, against humanity, against frankness, against religion, in order to preserve the state." With just a little imagination, readers can discern parallels between a 16th-century principality and a 20th-century presidency</b>. --Tim Hogan
J. H. Hexter, Washington University
A readable text in vigorous prose. I have not read a translation of The Prince into English that is more lively. --This text refers to the Hardcover edition.
Book Description
Rejecting the traditional values of political theory, Machiavelli drew upon his own experiences of office in the turbulent Florentine republic to write his celebrated treatise on statecraft. While Machiavelli was only one of the many Florentine "prophets of force," he differed from the ruling elite in recognizing the complexity and fluidity of political life.
Translated by George Bull
Introduction by Anthony Grafton --This text refers to the Paperback edition.
See all editorial reviews...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Spotlight Reviews (What's this?)
Write an online review and share your thoughts with other customers.
14 of 15 people found the following review helpful:
a chilling reflection, August 11, 2001
Reviewer: teencynic (see more about me) from Nicosia, Cyprus
Machiavellism is generally used as a bad term, meaning that you'll do anything to get what you want, regardless, and everyone and anyone who stands in your way ought to be neutralised, pulverised.
But that's no the way it always was.
After getting the sack for being a good patriot, Machiavelli used his knowledge of the internal affairs fo Florentine politics and summed it up neatly in this taut, deadly-accurate treatise on human nature.
He's an observer, Machiavelli, and the Prince was written based on a boss of his, Cesare Borgia. Now Borgia (whose aim was to conquer Central Italy) wasn't one to let anything get into his way. He was ruthless, cunning, cruel. Did I mention that he's brilliant?
Machiavelli wrote on more, like on trading, on enemies, on governing. It teaches one on ways to become a politician, a president, or...a prince, with rules and tricks that every successful person uses but will never admit to.
All these lessons are packed into a slim tome, not quite novella as much as political guide, and the way through the minefields in this messy game of forging ahead.
After reading this, you either love it or hate it -I wouldn't know: I liked it. But no matter how hard one tries to deny what the author says, there's no way to escape from the parallels of Machiavelli's day and ours.
Was this review helpful to you?
56 of 58 people found the following review helpful:
Realistic Map of How Power is Achieved and Maintained, August 14, 2000
Reviewer: Wayne A. Smith (see more about me) from Wilmington, DE USA
There are two good reasons to read Machiavelli's classic, "The Prince."
First, so you'll know what everyone is referring to when you come across the adjective "machiavellian" in news stories or other media. This adjective has become so commonplace (and overused) it is almost a cliche. Also, most who use it have never read this letter from Machiavelli, a Rennaisance courtier to his Prince (written from prison), but they insist on peppering writings with this noun turned adjective so much that as a matter of clearly understanding what is meant by the term, famiality with this brief treatise is helpful.
Second, this book does describe most (not all) power situations very well. From politics to corporations to most settings where advancement, influence and control exist, Machiavelli's observations and rules apply.
You will also discover that Machiavelli was not as evil as he is understood to be in popular thought. What he was doing was describing the rules of the game that have existed and always will exist for many situations involving selfish humans in competition. Machiavelli's rules are neither good nor bad in themselves -- they describe a process. What is good or bad is how those who master Machiavelli's rules use their power and position, in a society that tempers actions according to law and basic Judeo-Christian principals. When those principals do not exist (as in Nazi Germany, the Middle Ages or under Communism, or by those who refuse to live by these constraints), Machiavelli's rules take on their demonic and evil cloak; usually because they serve demonic and evil ends. In societies where positive constraints exist, for example the U.S. political system, Machiavellian behavior can produce excellent results. A good example involves Abraham Lincoln, whose ambition led him to use every legitimate trick and stragety to master (and remove) political opponents. His mastery of Machiavellian behavior constrained by the US political system allowed him to save the Union and end slavery.
To fully appreciate the modern lessons that can be taken from this writing, one must translate Medieval sensibilites to their contemporary counterparts. The casual way in which Machiavelli discusses the need to kill opponents was necessary to those who wished to be princes 500 years ago. Today, of course, "killing" is translated as rendering less powerful, or taking an opponent out of the game.
What does one get from this book? It is a roadmap with insights and lessons about how to 1) get ahead of others to attain power; and 2) maintain and expand one's power in the face of others who would usurp one who is in a desirable position.
This book is about ruthlessness and putting the attainment of goals ahead of any other consideration. Plenty of maxims that are also tossed about frequently in media are to be found in Machiavelli's book: "the end justifies the means," "it is better to be feared than loved," "if you fight the prince, kill the prince" to name a few.
It is essential reading to anyone who would be in a competitive environment and hope to advance, if for no other reason than many of one's competitors operate by Machiavelli's dictums (which arise out of human instinct and selfishness). One does not have to operate according to Machaivelli's code -- many examples of alturism and "pluck and luck" exist to defeat any claim that Machiavelli's road map is essential for success. However, human nature and human history deliver far more examples of ruthless self-interest (Machiavellianism) behind success in power situations.
Is Machiavellianism bad? Not in and of itself. Remember, one must translate the Middle Age ethos to current practices -- there usually isn't blood spilled as a result of today's Machiavellian duels, just power and positon. Most political and business leaders are at least partly Machiavellian. The trick is using one's power to good ends. Thus, even though Lincoln and all of our presidents were Machiavellian in their climb to the White House, some of them did darn good work there. The same is true for business leaders. Jack Welch (GE), Bill Gates (Microsoft), anyone who advances past the first few rungs of the corporate ladder or dominates markets at the expense of competitors is using Machiavelli's dictums. The trick of a just and good society is to set the bounds by which power can be attained and exercised so that good and benefits will flow from those who are able to "claw their way to the top."
To summarize, read this book if you want to 1) truly understand when the adjective "Machiavelli" is used to describe people and 2) understand the rules by which most people navigate their way to power.
Was this review helpful to you?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All Customer Reviews
Average Customer Review:
Write an online review and share your thoughts with other customers.
0 of 1 people found the following review helpful:
The best bok written on Leadership, June 10, 2004
Reviewer: Gabriel Cruz (see more about me) from Glendale, AZ USA
The Prince is a classic and must read book for all people in leadership or going in to business. --This text refers to the Paperback edition
Was this review helpful to you?
A good guide to Politics and Leadership, June 2, 2004
Reviewer: David Orozco from Santa Barbara, CA USA
I've never read any book related to politics in my whole life, and I found out by one of my World History teachers, that this book is a good way to get into politics and learn to be a good leader for your people.
The book really explains or simulates almost every single problem that a king, prince, president or any kind of governor would face. The book talks about how to treat the people of your kingdom, Machiavelly argues if you should use Love to rule your people or fear, to support his ideas Machiavelli uses examples from past rulers explaining what weaknesses they had and big mistakes the made.
For the first politic book I've ever read I found it really interesting and really helpful, the only thing that I didn't really like about it, was that to get a better understanding of the book you have to get some more background of the Kings, Dukes and governors he used.
Was this review helpful to you?
1 of 1 people found the following review helpful:
Classic deserving of its fame, April 7, 2004
Reviewer: JPAN (see more about me) from Saint Paul, Minnesota
This classic treatise is the most famous work on the subject of political power, and with good cause. Machiavelli outlines the basic principles of how to properly govern a kingdom, from whether it is better to fight with native troops (he argues that it is better to lose with your own soldiers than with with mercenaries) to whether it is better to be loved or feared (he clearly sides with the latter). Despite its somewhat negative connotations, the author goes to great lengths to outline why he comes to the conclusions he does. Taken in their proper context, Machiavelli's positions are, I believe, much less inflamatory than their stereo-types. One also must considers the time and circumstances in which the book was written.
In conclusion, this book is a must-read for anyone who considers themselves to be a reader of classics. I picked up this edition in the airport for 4 dollars...how could you go wrong? Anyone would be proud to place this on his or her bookshelf. --This text refers to the Paperback edition
Was this review helpful to you?
25 of 25 people found the following review helpful:
Tricky Work, Tricky Translation--Highly Recommended!, February 28, 2004
Reviewer: John Russon (see more about me) from Toronto, ON Canada
Machiavelli was a moderately significant figure in Renaissance Florence at the time that city was busy shaping the essence of the modern world. His works (all of them, but especially the Prince) capture much of what is pivotal in this culture. The book is advice to princes on how to seize and hold power. Mostly, that means you need to trick people and use ruthless violence intelligently. (He suggests that, if you could invent something like the Catholic Church, you'd be in a specially good position to set up a rule that would draw a lot of allegiance and a lot of taxes, would have no responsibilities, and would never end.) It's great reading as literature and as history, and also incredibly subtle and insightful as an analysis of human psychology. Mostly, this work praises cunning intelligence; it is also written for the reader who possesses the same. Consequently, it is a book that requires real patience and attention if its real treasures are to be found. Mansfield's translation is, I believe, the best for allowing one to look for the inner depth of the book. The translation is inspired by the work of Leo Strauss, and, as is typical of Straussian translations, it is a translation that is extremely careful to reflect the subtleties of the language of the original in order to retain their complex intimations etc. This is the translation I use when I teach the book because of its precision and elegance. It also has helpful historical notes that provide some of the essential context that is necessary to understanding Machiavelli's words; (Machiavelli often, for example, describes some historical figure in a fashion which will suggest the opposite of his true point to the reader who does not take the trouble to learn the details of the context he is referring to, and Mansfield is helpful in supplying guides to the modern reader for what to study in order to get past these textual deceptions). Overall, this is an outstanding translation of one of the great books of Western culture. I recommend it highly. --This text refers to the Paperback edition